Laserfiche WebLink
232 <br />drawn to buld 31 two-story units. <br />IN <br />When Mr. Stuart's plans were completed he proceeded to seek financing, and he told Mr. <br />Irwin on several occasions that he was unable to obtain financine until streets, curbs, �J <br />sidewalks acid storm drains were installed, but that Mr. Irwin should not mention that <br />fact to any of the neighbors. <br />Mr, Stuart has 110 fte frontage on Union Avenue. He will not pay one cent more for streets, <br />curbs, storm drains, etc* for 31 units than the other residents will have to pay for single <br />and duplex residences. Several residents have even more property and larger frontages <br />for a single dwelling unit. <br />The Planning Commission refused rezoning to R-3 for 18 one-story units an the recommendation <br />of the City Engineer. You, the City Council, rezoned to R-3 for 18 one-story units. <br />We realized at the time that these large lots could be used for more than a single duplex, <br />therefore, there was no protest to 18 one-story units, and if Mr. Stuart had kept faith <br />and not deceived the residents he would not have incurred any additional expense. His 18 <br />one-story units could have been nearly completed.by.this time. <br />The City Council by.restoring this property to its original R-2 zoning would be correcting <br />and injustice that was done under circumstances based more or less on misrepresentation of <br />facts. , <br />The statements made by some that such action on the part of the Council would deny the <br />people the protection of the zoning laws is incorrect. On the contrary, the rectification <br />of a previous error would serve to strengthen the faith of the people as a whole. <br />We feel sure that with the above facts, justice will prevail. <br />Very truly yours, <br />(ten signatures) <br />Mayor Royer stated that he had been contacted by on of the property owners in the area and had been <br />told that they would not object to an 18 unit apartment. He further stated that he had contacted , <br />Mr. Stuart's attorney and told him of the conversation. Mr. Dell 'Ergo stated that they could not <br />get the necessary financing to take care of the necessary overhead for an 18 unit apartment. Mr. Carl <br />Wood, 445 Redwood Avenue, spoke in favor of leaving the property in R-3 zone. Mrs. Roberts, 1630 <br />Union Avenue, Mrs. Lucille Haney, corner Union and Woodside Road, both spoke at some length against the <br />31 units and stated their reasons for doing so. Councilman Spillers stated that this was an injustice , <br />and he could not see why the Council was going to adopt a resolution of intention stating the Councils <br />intention because this has been back and forth between the Council and the Planniag Commission and <br />P <br />he could not see why this had to be done. Why not just vote on whether they will rezone or not. City <br />Attorney Currie stated that this was the quickest method and this is the one legal way to proceed <br />with this problem because of the tie vote. This was followed by discussion by Mre De11'Ergo, Council- <br />men Granger, Weiss,Stout and Herkner* Councilman Herkner amended the motion so that if the motion <br />prevails that the Council would look in favor of the 18 units. City Attorney Currie was of the opinion <br />that this would have to be a separate motion. The original motion carried on roll call with Council- <br />man Spillers and Mayor Royer voting N0. <br />The Mayor announced that this will be referred back to the Planning Commission. Councilman Herkner <br />moved that this Council looks with favor to the building of 18 units on this property, seconded by <br />Councilman Spillers. City Attorney Currie stated that this will come back to the Council and that <br />this motion was expression of opinion of the Council. Councilman Herkner included in the motion to keep <br />this building at a.30t setback as the other homes in the block. This was followed by discussion in <br />regard to one story units. Councilman Weiss offered a substitute motion that the Council will look <br />with favor upon a proper development of the land if suitable plans are submitted and a application for <br />rezoning is submitted. This substitution. lost for lack of a second. The original motion carried <br />on roll call. <br />Mre Stuart asked when this would come -up before the Planning Commission. The Mayor stated that this <br />will probably be the first meeting of next month. This was followed by discussion in regard to what <br />action Mr. Stuart could take. <br />The Mayor declared a recess at 10:20 Pe M. Councilman Spillers left the meeting at this time. <br />